Common Dressing Styles and Attributes Associated with Students’ Dressing Styles in Kenyan Public Universities

  • Otieno Gladys Akinyi Maseno University
  • Susan Abong’o, PhD Maseno University
  • Keren Mburugu, PhD Kenyatta University
Keywords: Dressing Style, Modesty, Attributes, Public Universities, Kenya
Share Article:


The study sought to examine students’ dressing styles and common attributes assigned to them. A descriptive survey design was used in this study. The study areas were the University of Nairobi, Egerton University, Moi University, Technical University of Mombasa, Maseno and Karatina Universities. Multiple sampling procedures were used to select 566 students who participated in the study. Data were collected using questionnaires, focus group discussions and observation checklists. Results show that majority of respondents bought their own clothes with funds provided by the parents or guardians. The most outstanding feature that informed choice of dress was aesthetics, followed by comfort and design. Vests, bare chest tops and shorts were considered modest while high-slitted skirts, miniskirts, unbuttoned shirts, boob-tops, tumbo-cuts, skin-tight dresses and trousers and Bermuda shorts were found to be immodest. Recommendations have been made to develop guidelines on the choice of dress for students in institutions of higher learning to enhance personal grooming.


Download data is not yet available.


Awasthi, B. (2017). From Attire to Assault: Clothing, Objectification, and De-humanization–A Possible Prelude to Sexual Violence? Frontiers in psychology, 8, 338.

Barnes, R., & Eicher, J. B. (Eds.). (1992). Dress and gender: Making and meaning in cultural contexts (Vol. 2). New York: Berg.

Brock, M. K., & Ulrich, P. V. (2010). Exploring the Apparel Needs and Preferences of Tween Girls and Their Mothers. Clothing and Textiles Research Journal, 95-111.

Butler, M. G. (1975). Clothes: Their choosing, making and care. London: B. T. Batsford.

Damhorst, M. L. (1990). In search of a common thread: Classification of information communicated through dress. Clothing & Textiles Research Journal, 1-12.

Ehrich, L. C. (1994). The problematic nature of dress for women managers. Women in Management Review, 9 (2), 29-32.

Grammer, K., Renninger, L., & Fischer, B. (2004). Disco clothing, female sexual motivation, and relationship status: Is she dressed to impress? Journal of sex research, 41(1), 66-74.

Howlett, N., Pine, K., Orakçıoğlu, I., & Fletcher, B. (2013). The influence of clothing on first impressions. Journal of Fashion Marketing and Management: An International Journal, 17, 38-48.

Johnson, K. K., Schofield, N. A., & Yurchisin, J. (2002). Appearance and dress as a source of information: A qualitative approach to data collection. Clothing and Textiles Research Journal, 20(3), 125-137.

Kaiser, S. B. (1997). The Social Psychology of Clothing. Symbolic appearances in context. 3rd edition. New York: Macmillan.

Kefgen, M., & Touchie-Specht, P. (1971). Individuality in clothing selection and personal appearance: A guide for the consumer. New York: Macmillan.

Lennon, S. J. (1990). Effects of clothing attractiveness on perceptions. Home Economics Research Journal, 18(4), 303-310.

Lennon, S. J., Fairhurst, A., & Peatross, F. (1991). Apparel and Furniture Attribute Importance as a Function of Self‐Monitoring. Home Economics Research Journal, 19(4), 292-302.

Lennon, S. J., Johnson, K. K., & Schulz, T. L. (1999). Forging linkages between dress and law in the US, part I: Rape and sexual harassment. Clothing and Textiles Research Journal, 17(3), 144-156.

Lennon, S. J., Johnson, K. K., Noh, M., Zheng, Z., Chae, Y., & Kim, Y. (2014). In search of a common thread revisited: what content does fashion communicate? International Journal of Fashion Design, Technology and Education, 7(3), 170-178.

Liddell, L. & Samuels, C. (2004). Clothes and your Appearance. USA: Goodheart-Wilcox.

Olivola, C. Y. & Todorov, A. (2010). Fooled by first impressions? Re-examining the diagnostic value of appearance-based inferences. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 46(2) 315-24.

Pongo, N. A. & Obinnim, E. (2016). The Relationship between Clothes and First Impressions: Benefits and Adverse Effects on the Individual. International Journal of Innovative Research and Advanced Studies, 3(12) 229-33.

Rudd, N. A., & Lennon, S. J. (2001). Body image: Linking aesthetics and social psychology of appearance. Clothing and Textiles Research Journal, 19(3), 120-133.

Storm, P. (1987). Functions of Dress. Tool of culture and the individual. New Jersey: Prentice Hall.

Tijana, T., Tomaž, T., & Čuden, A. P. (2014). Clothes and Costumes as Form of Nonverbal ommunication. Tekstilec, 57(4).

Todorović, T., Čuden, A. P., Košak, K., & Toporišič, T. (2017). Language of Dressing as a Communication System and its Functions–Roman Jakobson’s Linguistic Method. Fibres & Textiles in Eastern Europe, 5(125): 127-135.

7 January, 2021
How to Cite
Akinyi, O., Abong’o, S., & Mburugu, K. (2021). Common Dressing Styles and Attributes Associated with Students’ Dressing Styles in Kenyan Public Universities. East African Journal of Interdisciplinary Studies, 3(1), 1-11.